For more than fifteen years, our client rented office and production facilities. In 2020, the client decided to move to another production site, as notified by the landlord, and they coordinated the list of works to bring the vacated premises back to their original state.
The client completed the agreed-upon repair work and vacated the premises as per the agreement. However, the landlord refused to accept the premises and sign the appropriate document, citing their improper condition. Then the landlord applied to the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region with claims against our client to oblige the premises to be brought into their original condition and to recover arrears in rent.
In case A56-64052/2021, we insisted that the work for which the claim was filed was not included in the list agreed upon by the parties, and that there is no evidence that the disputed defects in the premises arose during the lease. The court agreed with our arguments and refused to satisfy the claim. The decision was upheld by the appellate court. In the cassation appeal, the Plaintiff decided to change their procedural strategy, abandoning the previously stated arguments and indicating that the Company had no right to refuse the lease agreement at all. The court also rejected these arguments.
